6 known cases. View patent page →
The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) decision that Adidas had not demonstrated that the challenged claims of US8266749 were unpatentable as obvious.
Puma challenged Nike's complaint and moved to dismiss claims of infringement for US8266749 and US9078488, arguing that the patents did not cover patentable subject matter; the court denied the motion.
Lululemon filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging claims 1-21 of US8266749, which the PTAB instituted, with ongoing arguments regarding claim construction and anticipation.
A jury initially found for Nike and awarded damages, but the district court granted a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law for Lululemon, ruling US8266749 invalid based on obviousness and overturning the jury's verdict.
Nike accused New Balance of infringing US8266749 (among other patents) with almost two dozen New Balance sneaker models in a lawsuit filed in Massachusetts.
Nike accused Skechers of infringing US8266749 (among other patents) with more than two dozen Skechers models; Skechers alleges the claims of the '749 patent are invalid, with parallel litigation ongoing.